Appeal No. 1998-0460 Page 8
Application No. 08/480,765
change the operating control program of CPU 26 by providing
different parameters, rather than different executable
instructions.” (Examiner’s Answer at 4.)
The examiner misinterprets the scope of claims 12-16, 18,
34-63, and 68-70. “[W]hen interpreting a claim, words of the
claim are generally given their ordinary and accustomed
meaning, unless it appears from the specification or the file
history that they were used differently by the inventor.” In
re Paulsen, 30 F.3d 1475, 1480, 31 USPQ2d 1671, 1674 (Fed.
Cir. 1994) (citing Carroll Touch, Inc. v. Electro Mechanical
Sys., Inc., 15 F.3d 1573, 1577, 27 USPQ2d 1836, 1840 (Fed.
Cir. 1993)).
Here, claims 12-16, 18, and 34-36 each specify in
pertinent part the following limitations:
A method of downloading program code to change the
control program for a computer in a subscriber
terminal of a subscription television system, the
method comprising the steps of:
...
... downloading new program code for at least a
portion of the control program of the computer ...,
the control program operative for controlling
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007